Eating Jim Crow(ley): What the Cop Forgot to Say to Professor Gates

>

What Sgt. James (Jim) Crowley meant to say to Professor Henry Louis Gates:

"Oh I am terribly sorry sir. We had received a phone call from a member of the public who thought that she was witnessing a break-in -- so that's the sole reason I was sent here.

Since I now understand that this is your own home, it is clear that while she presumably meant well, she actually made a dreadfully wrong assumption. And the police dispatcher was reacting to that.

I am pleased that I came here -- because if it had been a break-in it would have been my responsibility to protect your property.

But now that I understand that you are the home-owner -- and you were simply having trouble getting into your own home -- will you please accept my profuse apologies for my intrusion. And the apologies of the Cambridge Police Department for what has transpired to be an erroneous assumption.

You must be very tired after your ordeal and your travel today -- so I shall take my leave of you. I do understand your anger at being wrongly accused of being an intruder in your own home. If I was in your shoes I would be equally angry.

I hope that when you calm down from your quite understandable anger -- you will comprehend that the police department's action was simply us trying to protect your property.

While I hear that you think my assumption was based on your race, I strongly assure you that that was not the case. But if you wish to make a formal complaint about your belief -- you are of course at liberty to do so.

As you are very distressed -- I will write down my name and badge number for you.

Sir, I am going to leave now. Again my deepest apologies for the intrusion. And I wish you well."

Follow Martin Lewis on Twitter: www.twitter.com/TheMartinLewis

Comments

[larry278]

FYI, Jim Crow isn't dead. It lives in 50 states & other possessions of the USA.

[AhnAmuru]

[Puzzled] ... thought he lived & worked in Boston.

[AhnAmuru]

Oops' "lives and works".

[edgarcaycedoc]

Would Gates rather have had the cop approach a real burglar, ask who he was, taken his word and left the B&E to vandalize and burglarize his home?

[LeftRight]

Once the identification was shown, your scenario disappears. And since he showed the ID BEFORE he was arrested..­..

[edgarcaycedoc]

Wouldn't Gates have also been mad if the cop approached someone who is trying to break into his house and the cop asked who they were, then taken their word for it, and left the B&E to vandalize his property and steal his valuables?

[Martin Lewis - Huffpost Blogger]

I'm sure he would have had that occurred. However - that is not what happened here. The cop did not just take Gates' word for who he was. The cop verified Gates' identity. Saw picture identity and had confirmation from the Harvard Police. At that point the appropriate response for the policeman would be to apologize and leave. I have no doubt that Gates was expressing anger. I would and so would most people. It is also quite possible that Gates was attributing a racial motive to the cop's actions. The prudent action for the cop - especially one who had received sensitivity training - would be to have been understanding of Gates' anger - and graciously withdrawn from the house. Gates was NOT creating public disorder while he was in his own home. Leave the house - matter over.

[EqualMeansEqual]

To compare the police man to someone in the old south keeping blacks from the same water fountains is PATHETIC.
Just leave the house after a reported breaking when the original report said that TWO people where breaking in? So a angry home owner throwing a fit would make it "appropriate" to leave the scene when the 2 people could be in the house or around the area? What if they where in the house and ambushed Gates? What if they where hiding in the backyard from gates and the cop? You seem don't even know the details of the original call was about and how gates showing a id SHOULD not change the fact the cop thought 2 people where breaking in to a house. To stop someone from being "upset" he should endanger the public, considering he though that 2 people where in the area that where trying to break in to a house? So when someone makes a claim(that very likely is a false claim) of racism a cop should just leave the scene when the questions from the original police call have not been answered(how does Gates id change the fact that someone claimed to have scene 2 people breaking into house)? SO some one being "offended" should override the safety and protection of property of everyone in that neighborhood? That is simply PC garage.

[LeftRight]

Here's what happened, as far as Gates knew:

The cop showed up at the house for no reason. He insisted on identification.

Here's what happened, as far as the cop knew:

There had been a call about a breakin. There was a black man in the home. He insisted on identification.

Now then, had this happened to me, when the cop asked for ID, I'd have become belligerent. After all, I'm in my own home, and I had to break into it. I wouldn't know about the call, just that it seems a cop assumed that I am a burglar. Additionally, AFTER Gates showed his ID to the police, when they ALREADY KNEW that he lived there, THAT'S when they arrested him!!!

Once the ID was shown, the cops should have simply walked away!!